New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-04-16
ELEV1TED RAILROAD.
ATTITUDE OF THE ARCADE.

TY-owNERs ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS DAVIS
THINKS THE ARCADE BILL UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Tncreduity yesterday marked the faces OF the 200
property -owners-amoDg them j. J. Astor, o. b. Potter
Henry Hilton W. d. Sloane E. s. Higgins. Samuel Lord,
P. r. Barnum, j. NJ. Constable, c. L. Tiffany, f. &.
Jaflray, Eugene Kelly +. T. Teft. Robert ana
Ogden Goelet Amos X. and Amos F. Emo, j. A. Roosc-
welt, L. NJ. Bates, Morris X. Jesup, W. E. Dodge ana
Peter Mare-who have signed the following agreement:
In matter Of opposing the New York Arcade aSwsy
Bfsrsa It has been determined BY the owners o. largo
OF property situated Broadway and Madisonavo
70 oppose tbe Of The abcyena%ed railway and
sSs 1ad Of the charter o.
Whrsas counties has been orgahnsd t Sa am
;$sS s::S:
for the ana na: also aPPsi1tsd an exec
Cruger, Edward Mitchell Herman h. cammann and Henry
Now we tn. undersigned property situated
and sps
from the construction OF such railway DO hereby mutna
agree with the said treasurer or should
IN IKE ,s 70 o uS COMMITTEES or its
their may deem necessary
nth total tot dasT St
for Of O.r re- 5s.peCvs gas ss.
at the tin time Of subscribing hereto.
The reason for this ncreduy was explained by Aloon
p Man. who with exJudge John +. Dillon and ex7Jus-
tce Noah Davis is the legal representative these
property in their fight against the Arcade MI
Man Is we'll known as conservative cautious lawyer
the legal repository Of large interests notably those OF
Trinity Church. and all in all typical representative OF
he trained legal acumen OF the old school Yesterday
not only ncreduty but actual amazcmen characterized
his genial face
sTUPENDoUs AUDACITY.
81 can only call 1t piece OF stupendous dacity said
he on the part OF ex-senator Thomas to appear be-
fore the Senate Railroad Committee and make
such an argument he did yesterday IN
opposition to the Metropolitan Transit Companys bill
He took the ground openly and daringy, that he ap-
peared private interests and those interests were
those Of the Arcade Railway Company! Mr.. Thomas
stated that the Legislature had given the Arcade Railway
the right its underground road In Broadway
that the construction of metropolitan road would In
terere with the Arcade rights and taat therefore, the
rights bound to protect them and not pass the Metro
tam cc 9 o of h tina a the sepo
road would render impossible for the Arcade to
build its road
EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS IN BROADWAY.
Mr. Thomas boldly aud audacousy took the ground that
the Arcade had exclusive rights in Broadway 1t
could go down the earth and into the sky from
building building front, aud nobody had right
to prevent it, An employe OF the Arcade demonstrated
maps that the erection Of elevated road In Broad
an exclusive right TO Broadway Remember MI Ihom-
as declared that the LEGISLATURE had no gnt 70 a9" inc
lature had already placed the Arcade there
BLOWING HOT AND COLD.
I" Only a ago this same MI Thomas, then as now
the counsel OF the Arcade. appeared before this same
committee and argued that the Arcale bill not un
constitutional because did Sor gce me company er
ct,,sipe right Broadcay! Yesterday he turned around
and claimed Broadway as the exclusive right of the
Arcade II this is not blowing hot and cold On the Leg
islatire, hardly know what Is
But this is only part and parcel OF what the Arcade
has all along been doing u urged upon the Railroad
plea that they bad nothing 10 do with the con
stutonality OF the Arcade bill the courts would take
that Than Mr. hnrnn sgOas tD
OF the uaconstitutionay OF the Metropolitan bill urging
the constitutional amendments Of 1879. which amend
ments provide the Legislature shall not grant to
any private corporation, association or individual any
Certainly Mr. Thomas Arcade extremely audac
ous in thus presumng 10 60 before the Another
thing pr with this Is the endeayor OF The Arcade
Company to raise money to get ria 81 ,s certain prH
proposes understand. 10 get the Legislature TO re-
The rssircSns Which 70 Ue an nde h
fore beginning build. and TO expeDd not less than
$500 600 mile for chambers for gas and wnter pipes.
in repair by the companya Of which restrictions we're
| imposed al the cty's request"
| The NEW SUIT AGAINST THE ARCADE.
"The now suit against the Arcade in which Nathaniel
p Bailey Amos r. Emo and others join. will show
| clusiyely" SAID Mr. Man. that the Arcade bill was
wholly unconstitutional The complaint was prepared
by Judge Davis. Judge Dillon Mr. Auerbsch and myself"
| "Is it true" Mr. Man asked. that Judge
Davis first desired TO satisfy himself OF the unconstu
Onay OF the Arcade bill before he would consent 10 act
| as one OF the counseli'
| EX-JUsTICE DAvIs's OPINION.
ats. He has gone the ground carefully and the
complaint prepared with his aid lie holds. with US,
that there doubt OF the unconsttuonaty OF the
Arcade bills Mr. McAlpln yesterday admitted at Albany
that while the Arcade proposed TO take feet in
width In Broadway for its trackso say nothing OF the
way was in places a. narrow as thirtyf feet We
have had careful measurements made and assert
that wherever the change in the Arcades tubes Is made
from limit OF thrtytwo feet exterior measurement to
fortyfour feet thus Interfering with vaults etc. this
right given alone by the act OF 1856 and never ex
| listed before. We also made the following points:
the defendant corporation allowed to commence as
o. s IS
srss, %s.pslsy suit: and .passsI: c.. S.msss
PROPERTY estate and income and to al other owners Of prop
sSy The s Ss. alone
ss1 TO- c. 1ns OF along said Streets
And further slees that during and ~ such construction
MN S% Si % e BY % s ses
and other q tier prem
ss from ths P1ssen ns o on innnns neaa
sass1s below y: '
s value aSni.Ing upon the lac win 10 rep
sn s1 over
anna an sIo aseSsed
e sl as the and puP
pos poses residence
as%P. so!SYI,,
claimed by the defendant TO be by the
eral acts constituting alleged charter and especially
provisions chapter 3l2 OF the laws OF 1885,
CLAIMED by defendant TO extend the franchises VI
the corpora ion from house lin TO house line
and 10 United depth. would be difficult and danger
ous and Of be impracticable
that the fronts Of the buildings would have
be outside by umberinE and
sustain the while portions OF the
fronts being down ana rebuilt upon newly
epr and heavier foundations in consequence
OF dnring removal: that the buildings could not be
| Occupied others while this
| should DO in progress: that to carry into eIecu-
ton as the defendant threatens and about to do
| tho powers claimed by It to be granted by
Of almost all buildings That the work cannot be done under
| temporary bf1age described, but that tho
| street must be closed where tho excavation IA
| being made; that excavations TO the depth In
| tended made by the defendant will be accomps
the abuttins buildings and 10
tie buildings property OF the llantins and In
totally destructive Of such buildings that excavations
depth intended by the defendant under said
front Of the plaptins